A theoretical and empirical analysis of journal rankings: The case of formal lists

This study examines the use of formal rankings of journals by management departments for personnel decision purposes. We posit that the probability of adopting a list of formal rankings is related to a set of characteristics of the department. Few schools have formal lists of journals. Our empirical findings imply that the probability of adopting a list is positively correlated with department size and is inversely correlated with the perceived quality of the department. Considerable variation exists across such lists and across different institutions in the perceptions of the quality of journals. This suggests that, although lists may reduce the level of uncertainty regarding the assessment of research quality by providing explicit targets, lists may also induce faculty members to develop institution-specific human capital. This could reduce faculty mobility and impede career development.